VanEck Australian Floating Rate ETF vs Betashares Inflation-Protected U.S. Treasury Bond Currency Hedged ETF
These ETFs invest in different asset classes (shares vs bonds). They are unlikely to share holdings. General information only.
FLOT may suit investors seeking income and dividend distributions. UTIP may suit investors seeking income and dividend distributions.
Scored across Cost, Scale, Diversification, Income and Performance. General information only, not financial advice.
See full breakdown ↓General information only, not financial advice.
Overlap is estimated from the funds' listed top holdings, not their full constituent lists. These funds invest in different markets, so the expected overlap is approximately 0%.
VanEck Australian Floating Rate ETF
VanEck
Betashares Inflation-Protected U.S. Treasury Bond Currency Hedged ETF
BetaShares
Comparison scores reflect how each ETF compares to the other on these specific dimensions only. They are not absolute ratings or recommendations. General information only, not financial advice.
FLOT and UTIP are both Bonds ETFs: FLOT tracks the Bloomberg AusBond Credit FRN 0+ Yr Index and UTIP tracks the . Both charge 0.22% p.a. A holdings overlap is not reliably estimable for this pair. General information only, not financial advice.
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
Both charge about 0.22% p.a. in management fees.
FLOT manages $1.2B and UTIP manages $149.05M; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
FLOT holds 228 positions and UTIP holds 50; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
FLOT distributes approximately 5% (Monthly) and UTIP approximately 3.77% (Monthly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period FLOT returned 3.6% and UTIP returned 3.4%. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Green highlights the factually lower fee or higher scale/income figure. Performance is never highlighted. Data from issuer disclosures, reviewed quarterly.
Yield figures are estimates based on recent distributions and may vary. Past distributions are not a reliable indicator of future distributions. General information only.
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures. General information only.
FLOT top holdings
UTIP top holdings
Sector weights for UTIPare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
FLOT sectors
UTIP sectors
Geographic weights for UTIPare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
FLOT geography
UTIP geography
FLOT scores 7.0/10 and UTIP scores 5.4/10 on this comparison. FLOT has the higher overall comparison score.
FLOT may suit investors who: investors seeking income and dividend distributions.
UTIP may suit investors who: investors seeking income and dividend distributions.
FLOT and UTIP do not share enough listed top holdings to reliably estimate a holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors on this page. General information only, not financial advice.
FLOT and UTIP charge the same management fee of 0.22% per year. General information only, not financial advice.
FLOT (VanEck Australian Floating Rate ETF) manages approximately $1.2B and UTIP (Betashares Inflation-Protected U.S. Treasury Bond Currency Hedged ETF) manages approximately $149.05M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
FLOT and UTIP do not share enough listed top holdings to estimate overlap, so whether holding both duplicates your exposure depends on their full constituent lists. General information only, not financial advice.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. FLOT charges 0.22% and UTIP charges 0.22%, the same management fee. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors above and consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement and Target Market Determination. General information only, not financial advice.
General information only.This comparison and the ETFLens tools on this page provide general information about two exchange-traded funds and do not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not personal financial product or investment advice. ETFLens does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). Holdings overlap is calculated from each fund's published holdings (full lists where the issuer publishes one, listed top holdings otherwise), and fee data is sourced from fund manager PDS documents and updated quarterly. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. Consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) and Target Market Determination (TMD), and seek advice from a registered tax agent or licensed financial adviser, before making investment decisions.
Check your portfolio overlap
See how these ETFs interact with your other holdings.
Open overlap checker →Build your portfolio
ProModel a portfolio with these ETFs and see projected fees and income.
Build a portfolio →View full ETF profiles
Holdings, fees, sectors and distributions for each fund.
FLOT full profile →UTIP full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →